Well, I often wondered how long Topaz would survive on revenues from first-time-purchases only. Now, we know.
Having said that, I can also say that I am disappointed, but not surprised, by this change, as after 30+ years in the software development business, I fully understand the “why” of your decision.
But … I also have my own requests of Topaz … to uphold their end of the deal:
Of late, the products you release, along with the updates, have a tendency to be very, very buggy (obvious bugs that should have been picked up in first-day product test in your lab). Very often, Topaz products seem to be Beta (and often, Alpha) test code rather than finished, thoroughly tested products. So, if you are going to charge for updates, Topaz needs bring its testing game up to industry standards.
Product releases need to be more functional - it is great that you rush to release “something” to the market, but make sure that “something” is a complete product. For instance, Topaz released Mask AI as a “replacement” for ReMask, but it did not have the same functionality as the product it was replacing until several dot-releases later. With the free upgrades, we could suffer through the growing pains of the new product. But, with the change you are making, releasing products this way is no longer acceptable.
Now, don’t get me wrong … several Topaz products have become staples of my artistic work flow. But, that may have to change in the future if Topaz continues to release incomplete products suffering from shoddy workmanship, and charge me, the customer, for fixing their mistakes and ommissions.
Making this request is the only way for you to be fair to me, your customer, in light of the changes you are unilaterally making.
Let’s see, hmmm, $100 a year for noise reduction and file enlargement. When are you going to renege on the free upgrades with the programs in Studio too? August 2020 perhaps?
Oh, I should also add … Topaz needs to be much more responsive to user requests. For example, for years I (and others) have been asking for your plugins to be better integrated with the likes of Photoshop. In particular, making them well-behaved Smart Filters. Such requests have seemingly fallen on deaf ears … if you are now asking users to pay for upgrades, you need to start delivering on those requests.
For us, in 2014, Topaz was an initially large cost group of Photoshop plug-ins when we bought the WORKS to forever be free. As owners of a branding agency, commercial photo studio and juried fine artisan group, our common logic knew nothing could be free forever — someone will end up paying for Topaz or they will be disappear. That is just logical sense any business should have grasped especially high tech who requires R&D forever. Witnessed new products like Texture Effects and Glow and we also bought them forever. It got weird on the Studio for free but we bought AI versions as we saw your path to keep developing forwardly and making money but still forever free was chanted on each purchase. Whatever wall just smacked Topaz owners in the face, possibly Mac OS Catalina, that obstacle has been handled poorly and marketed even more worse. Whether Eric is the sole owner or a hired CEO, Eric has limited days left in that role and Topaz has a nightmare branding issue. Topaz just destroyed their own brand by renegotiating already prepaid software to their loyal customers, swapping out items for Studio that are less than stellar replacements with weirder workflows and now special stand alone AI apps that are charged subscription renewals to keep “forever” but pay periodically.
This is not meant to be a belligerent or politically sounding response to the CEO’s letter, to the contrary, Topaz has stunned me that anyone selling software as a business could have such a naive plan of approach to state as Eric does, “Conceptually, this (free) felt really good to us.” Followed by “we started to realize something. Product development and research is expensive!” This thinking, whether it’s labeled as progressive, liberal, or some new world order quest for equality of all that software should just be accessible, the logic or belief system never works when the money finally runs out and the need to research, pay employees, work harder and innovate while being under stress of financial burdens and timeframes becomes more cumbersome.
The concept of “free forever” should never have been stated at any point. We can accept the change from the Topaz we first found adorable as plug-ins in 2014 and some of the adapting for OS needs making them clunkier and becoming constant AI upgrade nuisances we now must follow. Rebranding a forthcoming update of existing products into a charge based system should have happened. Instead a letter just bombed Topaz’s loyal base abruptly shaking the trusted foundation Topaz had earned. Now Topaz will pay a heavy price in loss of renewals, your base will more openly seek other software options, and Topaz has lost its integrity in front of what was a solid base of Topaz enthusiasts.
I think this is very disappointing. One of the reasons I’ve bought so many of your programs is because of the lifetime upgrades. Recently when you released a major upgrade I understood the charge, but I would not have made the purchase if I had know this was going to happen. All of us bought into the lifetime upgrades, so this is you going back on your word.
I could understand you changing things going forward. Maybe you should have “grandfathered” in the existing customers or made an allowance for those that have been with you for many years.
One thing I think you could do, at the very least, is give everyone one year from today, not from when we last paid.
I have purchased things from you that I will not use. AI gigapixel I purchased to help support you. I have not used it and it’s unlikely I ever will.
Proposed model change itself is certainly fair, as no one can expect having forever new functionality for free. The are several key points I’d urge you to consider though:
1-Price level itself. $99 a year is a bit steep (at Adobe level). Most of your users can’t do without Photoshop/Lightroom - but can do without Topaz. So, not going over the board (or pushing out your customers) with aggressive pricing would be a wise step.
2-Added new functionality; yes, I’m certainly willing to pay. But if you are just fixing bugs via minor releases; these should be free.
3-The most critical one; once you start receiving that annual revenue stream; you better don’t get complacent and drift away from your innovation roots. It’s just too easy to claim otherwise. Unfortunately most of imaging software (once they get on that bandwagon) very quickly give up on their innovation and start coming up once a year BS “new versions” which don’t deliver anything. Here is a list of software I own (and purchased one or two nonsense upgrades afterwards) and finally completely gave up on them: OnOne, DxO and Photomatix. Athentech Perfectly Clear and Luminar are on borderline - heading to same waste-bin if they don’t stop wasting their dollars on hyped-up marketing then delivering very little.
I’ve been a Topaz customer for 7 years. Topaz has been on top of my list with it’s sincerely innovative products from day one.
If you loose that innovative spirit; you’ll be just another casualty in forgotten photography software grave yard. Plus charging a high-price for that will simply bring that drop decision faster.
I have been wondering how long it would be before upgrades were on a pay list. Free upgrades are nice but costly to produce.
Something that worries me is that release of a product that is not “quite” ready is fine when upgrades are free and most users know that things will be fixed. It is something that Topaz has done for some time, release the product, then fix it, bugs and usability, using user feed back and free upgrades. I have no problem with that. But when charging for upgrades that style of product release is not possible. It will be expected that it will work straight out of the box and be complete. OK you give 12 months that may suffice but you will need to work to that timetable.
As a pensioner I find that $49.00 is a mite expensive. $99 for all the AI products is more reasonable but even that may be beyond me when currency conversion is applied.
Having said that I think the need to be financial in the market place helps to create business longevity and Topaz has been part of my processing for many years. I think it important the the plugin line continue as well as the AI line. People need an entry point for the products and the plugins are ideal, hopefully they will then move up to the AI line as they progress.
Well you must have a good spin doctor to turn bad news to good. Like most people I can understand that a company cannot run on good will alone, but perhaps your original business model was flawed, Like another user I raise the legal implication of entering into an agreement of life time upgrades then tearing that agreement up. Further simply not advertising life time upgrades does not constitute a cessation of that policy.
Now my good news, I wont sue. In addition you can simply rework the older products rebadge them and sell them as a new product with no lifetime uprade offer.
However as a long time user I think there should be a better offer other than what you have given us. Additionally one assumes bug fixes are not upgrades and one should not have to pay for a “beta” like new upgrade.
I will probably upgrade some products but not all and I will use them as they are for now and ever. Perhaps the final word, caveat emptor.
I have to say I wouldn’t have bought Sharpen AI and Denoise AI if I’d know this. I appreciate you have to make money but I think the price of staying current will be too high, what happens if you introduce a serious bug then a person’s support runs out before its fixed? A lower renewal price would be acceptable but having to pay out every year to stay current is a bad business model. Your plugins are brilliant but I think this will drive away customers. I also don’t see how this will ‘better serve you’.
For customers like me and many others who have been long time customers and own just about all of your products, this deal stinks. We bought your products with the “free lifetime upgrades”. Now you ask us to pay for your mistakes. Sure R&D costs money. Get it from your new customers, we should be grandfathered. I am very disappointed with Topaz and will, sadly, most likely never upgrade nor buy another one of your products.
You’d need an unethical attorney to do it. Even if you are in the right, you’re going to get a check for 70¢ after whatever settlement or damages you get. The attorney is going to be the only one making money. You’d have to actually go read the license agreement you signed to see what it actually says.
Your previous recommendation on the product in your blog may also cost you in subscribers, along with all the others who endorsed it with the free upgrades. Can you relate to the possible revenue losses?
Well, this is a kick in the head. I’m not sure what happened to free upgrades forever, but this sounds like our ownership is being changed to rental, and that’s not what I signed up for. Bad news, indeed, for us, the clients. Good news for you “in the long run”, as long as people decide to fork over money every year into your coffers. I still love my Studio, but don’t love Studio 2, and if this in any indication of where “upgrades” are heading, I won’t be going there. Maybe, reconsider what you are charging for this “service”, and those of us who’ve been clients for many years might feel a little less betrayed.
Eric,
I have great news for you. Due to my financial situation, I will be unable to participate in your new renewal program. This is entirely my fault, I should have managed my finances better, rather than relying on your free upgrades for life policy. This is good news for you in the same way that your new policy is good news for users. I can understand that this is a business decision for you. I hope that you understand that it will be a business decision for me when the first payment is due.
It’s really depressing to read the doublespeak from Topaz. There is no good news here for anyone except your legal staff. Changing the conditions of a sale after the sale is unethical at a minimum. And weasel words don’t help. I recommend people who feel ripped off contact their state attorney general in this election year. In this business context, your lack of business acumen in designing a business model doesn’t concern me. Neither does the excellence (or mediocrity) of your products. We had a deal, do the right thing and adhere to honest practices. Consider implementing your new deal with new purchases. That would be fair. Here’s a tip: before you announce your new deal, define the difference between a bug fix and a true upgrade. Many of us have been around the keyboard for a long time and are wise to semantic weasel words that your peers in the biz favor. Since your credibility is less than it was yesterday, I’d give more thought to conveying exactly what you are doing here.
Well, that’s just spoiled my day!
I have been using various products over the years and lost some faith with products that do similar things.
At the end of last year I took a trial of DeNoise AI to see what was on offer. I have to say that I was really impressed and decided to come back to Topaz knowing that I would receive free upgrades under the impression that more improvement work was under way. On that experience I opted for Sharpen AI. Now this was a different experience I found that the stabalise method worked fairly well on a selection of images. The other 2 methods were almost useless as I found I could get better results using DeNoise AI. So, I suddenly realised Topaz were back at their previous model of producing similar products.
When AI Mask was released I immediately took a trial but from my testing there appeared not to be any AI involved it was just remask 5 in new clothing?
Now I understand that sales have probably been falling because buyers have taken advantage of the free upgrade. Loyal customers but in reality they never buy any products just receive free upgrades.
Now I’m sure we could all say. Okay we’ve had it good for ‘x’ number of years.It’s time we contributed for better software. However, the new price model is way to high compared to free! I can purchase Affinity Photo for £48.99 in the UK. That is a whole photo editing suite for the price of an upgrade to just 1 Topaz product! If I have more Topaz products. For 1 year of upgrades I can have 2 versions of Affinity! Then there are others which are basically free!
I am, to say the lest, very dissapointed in this new price model!
Topaz, let me warn you that you are in danger of losing a very large number of customers! I for one will be joining those who will review the terms and conditions and if as I have understood I am entitled to free upgrades I will be making moves to ensure that continues. Let me state that I find it really sad that I may have to take Topaz to task on that matter.
To conclude there are many customers who in reality have been Beta testers for your products. I have, with further use, found there to be problems in the AI products. I have been waiting for those to be addressed. I am also uncertain where I stand with the change to the DeNiose software. When the batch processing was announced I tried to update my software but received a message stating that my software was up-to-date! Looks like I need to contact support to see where I stand.
No good news for me today!
Steve - What is wrong with our society is that companies are not honest. They sell/promise you something and then don’t supply/live-up to their agreements.
It is Topaz’s responsibility to work out the pricing before they sell the product! Not sucker you in with a low price and promises and then change their minds. People like that deserve to be sued.
Topaz Lab products was purchased under your agreement that it would entitle me to FREE Lifetime upgrades. Changing to a paid upgrade structure, for an existing customer like myself, is tantamount to bait and switch.
Having been a longtime satisfied customer I would have preferred to continue to use your products. My expectation would be that you honor your original offer. Should your business practices no longer value your customer you may refund my purchases.
